- From: Dimitre Novatchev <dnovatchev@yahoo.com>
- Date: Fri, 5 Mar 2004 07:24:03 -0800 (PST)
- To: Michael Rys <mrys@microsoft.com>, Don Chamberlin <chamberl@almaden.ibm.com>
- Cc: public-qt-comments@w3.org
--- Michael Rys <mrys@microsoft.com> wrote: > I agree with Don's comment. > > Fn:unordered() is just a non-deterministic unordering of the passed in > sequence. The function is not a second order function as you imply. This is not implied by me, but by the really strange function definition and the answers I got to my questions about the definition of the function (e.g. this function is necessary in order to achieve better efficiency (of what?) of some unspecified processing that would be slower if it had to produce the sequence in order). If I didn't understand correctly the function definition and the explanations, it is a fact that I was not alone in this. > So > the semantics is very easy and simple. Then its name will better be: fn:unorder() and everything I've seen about the necessity for this function in order to achieve better efficiency -- every such explanation is no longer true. Dimitre Novatchev. __________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? Yahoo! Search - Find what you’re looking for faster http://search.yahoo.com
Received on Friday, 5 March 2004 10:24:34 UTC